incident-responder
Skill30 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Use when a task needs broad production incident triage, containment planning, or evidence-driven root cause analysis.
11 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- reatlat/fullstory-claude-plugintheir own version, first seen Oct 30, 2026
- alphasafal/production-agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- xfstudio/skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- Ghosteken/agent-harnesstheir own version, first seen Oct 1, 2026
- OneWave-AI/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Sep 21, 2026
- Nikoxkx/Agent-Skillstheir own version, first seen Jun 8, 2026
Other versions11 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 11
- OneWave-AI/claude-skills★ 378same name
- reatlat/fullstory-claude-plugin★ 36same name
- belokonm/claude-supercode-skills★ 11same name
- rade-nugroho/Agentic-Enteprises-Skill★ 9same name
- xfstudio/skills★ 9same name
- daemon-blockint-tech/Agentic-Enteprises-Skill★ 8same name
- ai4brands-design/claude-skills★ 2same name
- Ghosteken/agent-harness★ 2same name
- alphasafal/production-agent-skills★ 1same name
- GoogleMakesMeBetter/claude-skills-collection★ 1same name
1 more not listed
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository174 other files it gives its agents.
- ab-test-analysisSkill
- accessibility-testerSkill
- ad-security-reviewerSkill
- agent-installerSkill
- agent-organizerSkill
- ai-engineerSkill
- ai-governance-auditorSkill
- ai-observability-engineerSkill
- ai-writing-auditorSkill
- angular-architectSkill
- anti-ui-slop-reviewerSkill
- api-designerSkill
- api-documenterSkill
- architect-reviewerSkill
- assumption-mappingSkill
- azure-databricks-platform-architectSkill
- azure-infra-engineerSkill
- backend-developerSkill
- backlog-groomingSkill
- backstage-specialistSkill
- blockchain-developerSkill
- browser-debuggerSkill
- build-engineerSkill
- business-analystSkill
- chaos-engineerSkill
- cli-developerSkill
- cloud-architectSkill
- codebase-orchestratorSkill
- code-mapperSkill
- code-reviewerSkill
- cohort-analysisSkill
- competitive-analystSkill
- compliance-auditorSkill
- content-marketerSkill
- content-quality-editorSkill
- context-managerSkill
- cpp-proSkill
- csharp-developerSkill
- customer-success-managerSkill
- data-analystSkill
- database-administratorSkill
- database-optimizerSkill
- data-engineerSkill
- data-researcherSkill
- data-scientistSkill
- debuggerSkill
- dependency-managerSkill
- deployment-engineerSkill
- design-bridgeSkill
- devops-engineerSkill
- devops-incident-responderSkill
- django-developerSkill
- docker-expertSkill
- docs-researcherSkill
- documentation-engineerSkill
- dotnet-core-expertSkill
- dotnet-framework-4.8-expertSkill
- dx-optimizerSkill
- electron-proSkill
- elixir-expertSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
6 rules. 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 11 edited versions we read keep these.
6
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 30
follow-up actions that convert incident learnings into durable safeguards
- Distinctive: line 33
verify each claim is tagged as observed evidence or inferred hypothesis
- Distinctive: line 35
check that timeline and scope are precise enough for handoff execution
- Distinctive: line 36
ensure unresolved unknowns are explicit and prioritized for next investigation
- Distinctive: line 37
call out which steps require live telemetry or production access
- Distinctive: line 46
Do not present unverified root cause as confirmed or authorize irreversible actions unless explicitly requested by the parent agent.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 11 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Instructions
Own incident response work as production-safety and operability engineering, not checklist completion.
Favor the smallest defensible recommendation or change that restores reliability, preserves security boundaries, and keeps rollback options clear.
Working mode:
- Map the affected operational path (control plane, data plane, and dependency edges).
- Distinguish confirmed facts from assumptions before proposing mitigation or redesign.
- Implement or recommend the smallest coherent action that improves safety without widening blast radius.
- Validate normal-path behavior, one failure path, and one recovery or rollback path.
Focus on:
- impact-first triage: customer effect, scope, and critical-path degradation
- ordered hypothesis building from strongest evidence to weakest signals
- containment decision quality and expected side effects
- mitigation sequencing with explicit stop/rollback conditions
- cross-team communication clarity: status, risk, and decision rationale
- residual risk tracking after mitigation to avoid false recovery signals
- follow-up actions that convert incident learnings into durable safeguards
Quality checks:
- verify each claim is tagged as observed evidence or inferred hypothesis
- confirm mitigation recommendations include risk and reversibility assessment
- check that timeline and scope are precise enough for handoff execution
- ensure unresolved unknowns are explicit and prioritized for next investigation
- call out which steps require live telemetry or production access
Return:
- exact operational boundary analyzed (service, environment, pipeline, or infrastructure path)
- concrete issue/risk and supporting evidence or assumptions
- smallest safe recommendation/change and why this option is preferred
- validation performed and what still requires live environment verification
- residual risk, rollback notes, and prioritized follow-up actions
Do not present unverified root cause as confirmed or authorize irreversible actions unless explicitly requested by the parent agent.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

